BuzzerBeater Forums

I saw the link on the other forum. I invite you to link this poll also in the threads that will pop up to complain about the change and see if that affects the results.

I will try and do so, but also, please feel free to do this yourself.

The more people who vote the better.

Seems to me that for every one who hates change or doesnt like this change and has a whinge on a thread about the over-extension tax, there is at least 5 other people trying to rationally explain the benefits of the change to the game.

The better Managers will be doing some deep thinking about the implications of the change and change their strategies to suit and some might even profit with some trades during the markets short term over reaction, and they will inevitably rise to the top in a few seasons time

Hence my negative vote, not for the change itself which is neutral for 80% of the users and probably more, but for prioritising it over changes everyone would benefit from.

In bigger picture, there has been long time much discussion related to training; is it reasonable at all to focus on training or would it be much more beneficial to use cheapest coach, train game shape, free throws etc. and just buy players. You could also have very limited amount of players, no need to get 48 minutes for a specific position, maybe use old cheap veterans. Only cost of coach is about the same than theoretical selling price increase, due to training, for your players per season.

Now this new feature would make life much harder for teams who are not training at all. And I think it is good for the game, training is more valued than earlier and above strategy will not captivate whole BB ;)

It's clear that most of teams, probably 80% as you said, are making small profit every week, because they are not in competitive league, or they are not fully fighting for a victory for this season. So this change doesn't impact for those teams this season....but I think this new feature is some kind of insurance for all teams, when they are putting "all-in", they know that if some other team is trying to "buy" victory, it will be much more expensive than earlier.

Thats why I cheer up for the latest changes!

Now this new feature would make life much harder for teams who are not training at all. And I think it is good for the game, training is more valued than earlier and above strategy will not captivate whole BB ;)

You know what I realized that for me it's more fun buy old already trained players and train them GS and win games instead of spend tons of money on buying trainees and trainers and when spend even more and paying salaries for trainers.

Luckily, you can still use your approach. Just, you won't get any exemption on the overextension tax.

You know what I realized that for me it's more fun buy old already trained players and train them GS and win games instead of spend tons of money on buying trainees and trainers and when spend even more and paying salaries for trainers.

I agree, it's very valid strategy. It should be quite easy to remain in league, not probably easy to win anymore. Other teams can save 50% of tax costs due to own trainees. Top teams are currently paying 100-250k extra salaries compared to average income level....of course top teams will make bigger arena and merchandise incomes.

Thanks for the poll. I tried to go through the help thread and find something of substance regarding the impact of purchased players and their decline/increase in salary. Any chance we can get a thread on this tax ine the "read this" or "game rules" or "important threads" thread?

Thanks for the poll. I tried to go through the help thread and find something of substance regarding the impact of purchased players and their decline/increase in salary. Any chance we can get a thread on this tax ine the "read this" or "game rules" or "important threads" thread?

Well I dont have those type of powers and I believe that the market is currently so dynamic that the possible impacts to it will quickly change.

My gut feel is that potential trainees and developing trainees (around 22 years of age) will sell for a considerable amount more than previous

That older developed players will drop in value, but over time the market will recover a little and they will regain some of this drop in value

Well when I first heard about this tax, I freaked out to be honest. I did not understand it's purpose, and I don't understand fully not even know. However, I can say this. My view is that it will not change much, nonetheless it is one small step towards making this game better.

A very small percentage of teams will go bankrupt, another percentage of smart-ass managers will just buy some center and train him in primaries and get rid of this tax. However, most of the decent managers are not even affected at all by this. It's even better for the guys that tank(this is just my opinion), because they will be forced to train 2-3 guys and keep them, which is actually a much better strategy than just tanking stupidly and then buying a whole new team.

I'm enthusiastic to see how it will affect us in the long run, and I'm interested to hear more about what the devs prepared for us, and I will keep the conclusion. It is not an immediate improvement, but I hope it's just a small piece of a bigger pie, and I'm looking forward towards seeing what's next

Last edited by Boston Celts at 1/1/2014 6:23:55 PM

On the Dutch forum ,we have the same poll,we can only vote YES or NO
And the results for now are very different ,and I think that's pretty weird:)We have 200 managers.
I don't think it will change much,because we have maybe 25 managers who are active on the Dutch forum.
I just wanted to share this:

YES 13
56,5%

NO 10
43,5%

YES 13
56,5%

NO 10
43,5%

Plus 1 for sharing.

Is that 53% in favour of the change.

Maybe part the reason for the difference is that we had a weeks worth of debating prior to the poll being started



Last edited by Sid Vicious at 1/2/2014 5:59:42 AM

Is that 53% in favour of the change. Yes...